Connect with us

Current Affairs

In the absence of evidence, PAP repeats use of sophistry to justify its beliefs to Singaporeans

Published

on

On 28 March (Thursday), Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat made a statement that most Singaporeans might not be ready for an ethnic minority PM. He said this in response to a questioned asked by Assistant Professor Walid Jumblatt Abdullah of Nanyang Technological University (NTU)’s School of Social Sciences’ public policy and global affairs programme at a forum at the university.

His statement had drawn criticism from a large group of netizens including author and freelance writer at The Economic Intelligence Unit Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh and former associate dean of Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy Donald Low.

In the forum, Mr Heng was asked if it is Singapore or the ruling PAP (People’s Action Party) that’s not ready for a non-Chinese Prime Minister.

Responding to this, Mr Heng asked the audience to raise their hands if they were happy to have an ethnic minority individual as their PM. It appears that many audience members out of the 700 students present raised their hands.

Mr Heng then said, “My own experience in walking the ground, in working with different people from all walks of life, is that the views – if you go by age and by life experience – would be very different”.

He added, “I do think that at the right time, when enough people think that way, we would have, we may have, a minority who becomes the leader of the country. But if you ask me, that whether across the voting population, would that be the outcome, I personally don’t think so,” he was quoted saying in an article by The Straits Times.

Following his statement, author and freelance writer Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh, took his Facebook account to share his viewpoints on Mr Heng’s statement and PAP generally.

Focusing on the bigger issue in Finance Minister’s statement, Vadaketh said that his main concern is “PAP’s repeated use of sophistry to hammer home its ideologies”.

For example, he said that the Government uses empirical evidence only to its advantage. This means that when the evidence supports them, they glorify it but, if it is against them, then PAP convinces its citizens to look at other things like anecdotes, observations and feelings, including race.

“All the available electoral and survey evidence points to the fact that Singaporeans are very comfortable with non-Chinese leaders. Incidentally, this goes all the way to JB Jeyaretnam (JBJ), who won a by-election in 1981 against the PAP’s Chinese candidate, and then held onto his seat in the 1984 general election,” he explained.

Vadaketh then questioned if Mr Heng has excluded all those who voted for JBJ 38 years ago when he mentioned that the older generation is not ready for a non-Chinese PM. “I’m pretty sure if they voted for JBJ then, they’d vote for Tharman today,” he added.

Besides that, he also expressed that PAP conveniently ignores available evidence for other policy areas when it doesn’t suit its objectives, including issues surrounding inequality and hosting the Youth Olympic Games or Formula 1.

“For the latter, I’ve heard all sorts of wishy washy justifications made. “Oh the benefits are intangible! It helps the Singapore brand!” Yes, that nebulous “brand” is the easiest get-out-of-jail card to defend any grandiose project,” he wrote.

He also highlighted that when society’s own biases and prejudices go hand-in-hand with PAP’s, then it appears that no issue seems to be a problem and “there is a sudden deference to the common person”.

Although Vadaketh understands that these are tactics placed by all political parties, but he said that he has the urge to point out to many Singaporeans who still have this rose-tinted view of the PAP and its motives.

“Alas, they’re all just politicians. It’s important for us to think clearly about all these issues so that we can keep improving debate – and well, life – here,” he said.

Upon reading Vadaketh post, Prof Donald Low, senior lecturer at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology and former associate dean of Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, shared his post and said he fully agrees to what the author said.

Low, who is the co-author of the book “Hard Truth” with Vadeketh, added that he once asked Mr Heng what is his opinion on the obvious “paradox in Singapore between the fact that Singaporeans have high levels of trust in the government but also that a couple of surveys (such as the World Values Survey) show Singaporeans to have low trust in one another.”

Responding to Low’s question, the Finance Minister’s response was almost the same like what he gave recently – that based on the ground and interactions with residents, he disagreed with the survey finding that Singaporeans didn’t trust one another.

As such, Low who agrees with Vadaketh said that in the absence of evidence, the PAP is rationalising and justifying whatever they wish to believe.

He added, “This is also known as motivated reasoning; your reasoning is driven by your motivations, beliefs and biases, not by evidence.”

Low ended his post by mentioning that in philosophy, the PAP’s method of ignoring evidence when it doesn’t favour them is called “failing Popper’s falsification test, which states that your statement is a meaningless one if you cannot specify the conditions under which it is fake.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

on

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Trending